In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India granted bail to two doctors accused in a Tramadol-related case, holding that failure to provide written grounds of arrest violated constitutional safeguards.
Background of the Case
The case involved Dr. Rajinder Rajan and Dr. Jatinder Malhotra, linked to a hospital and its in-house pharmacy in Amritsar. According to the record, a consignment of 2,000 Tramadol tablets was delivered, allegedly due to a supplier’s error, though only 200 tablets had been ordered.
Before the excess stock could be returned, the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) conducted a raid and seized the tablets. The doctors were later arrested under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Their bail pleas were rejected by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
Read also:- Madras High Court Initiates Suo Motu Contempt Against Interview Host in G-Square Case
During the hearing, the bench closely examined whether the accused were properly informed about the grounds of arrest.
The Court referred to its earlier ruling in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra, emphasizing that informing an accused of the grounds of arrest in writing is a constitutional requirement.
“The constitutional mandate of informing the arrestee the grounds of arrest… must be strictly followed,” the bench observed.
It noted that while the arrest memo mentioned that the grounds were explained orally, there was no evidence that written grounds were supplied within the required time frame.
Read also:- Jharkhand HC Orders Statewide Burn Units in 120 Days After Hazaribagh Tragedy Exposes Gaps
The Court pointed out that merely stating compliance in a standard arrest memo format was insufficient.
“Such a requirement cannot be treated as an empty formality,” the bench indicated in substance.
The central issue was whether non-supply of written grounds of arrest rendered the custody illegal.
The Court found that the requirement flows from Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution, which protect personal liberty and ensure procedural fairness.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Asks UP Police Why Union Minister Was Named Without ‘Mr’ or 'Hon'ble' in FIR
Holding that the mandatory procedure was not followed, the Court ruled that the arrest stood vitiated.
“The appellants are entitled to be released from custody,” the bench stated while allowing the appeals.
Accordingly, the Court directed that both doctors be released on bail, subject to conditions to be fixed by the trial court.
Case Details:
Case Title: Dr. Rajinder Rajan v. Union of India & Anr.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 3326–3327 of 2026
Judge: Justice Vikram Nath & Justice Sandeep Mehta
Decision Date: April 1, 2026
Counsels: Shri S. Nagamuthu, Shri P.V. Dinesh (for appellants); Shri Anil Kaushik, ASG (for respondents)
